37 pages • 1 hour read
Helmut Walser SmithA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
“The butcher’s tale” has a number of meanings and functions on a number of levels in the book. It refers principally to the gruesome murder of Ernst Winter, carried out with a method reflecting the butcher’s trade. It also refers to the petition which the Christian butcher, Hoffmann, published to exonerate himself and incriminate his Jewish colleague Lewy. This meaning can be extended to evoke the Jewish ritual murder legend itself—a “tale” (that is, a myth) of butchery that was perpetuated throughout the centuries. This sense of the phrase can also be turned around to reflect the hideous violence practiced by Christians toward Jews throughout the book.
In titling his book The Butcher’s Tale, Smith evokes and advertises the graphic and grisly nature of its subject matter. The title also reminds us that two different butchers—one Christian, one Jewish—are at the center of the story.
The legend of Simon of Trent ascribed the murder of a young boy in the northern Italian city of Trent in the 15th century to a ritual murder carried out by the city’s Jews. Simon was venerated as a martyr for centuries, and a graphic depiction of the martyred child was installed under the bridge tower in Frankfurt, Germany. Although in 1609 the city’s Jews petitioned to have the painting removed, the city council rejected the plea and the painting remained in place until the late 18th century, where poet Johann Wolfgang von Goethe saw it as a child (106). Goethe describes its effect on him as gruesome and forbidding, and it “encouraged his initial aversion to the Jewish quarters” (106). The painting serves as a powerful symbol of the ritual murder myth as it persisted for centuries in the minds of many Christians.
This is another physical symbol of the Jewish ritual murder legend as it lodged in the minds of many Christians. The legend of Judenstein recounted that a boy in Rinn, Germany, named Andreas Oxner was killed by traveling merchants in a forest in 1462. Suspicion did not fall on the Jews at first, but after the legend of Simon of Trent became known several years later, townspeople became convinced that the Jews had ritually tortured Andreas on a “Jew stone.” A shrine grew up around Andreas’s remains and the Holy See approved the cult.
Chief Prosecutor Schweigger is the official who continues the Konitz investigation past 1901. Early that year, District Attorney Lautz contacts him requesting permission to reconsider Hoffmann as the possible murderer. Schweigger refuses, believing the case against Hofmann closed. Later, Schweigger similarly refuses to consider Braun’s theory concerning Masloff, thinking it far-fetched.
Smith points out the irony of the translation of Schweigger’s name (“silencer”) since in both cases he shuts down channels of inquiry in the investigation. Because of Schweigger’s “silence,” the case remains unsolved. Silence in this sense may also suggest the idea of complacency about antisemitism in German society.